2015 Mercedes-Benz C220

From 2000 through 2017, Takata produced millions of air bag inflators using two types of phase-stabilized ammonium nitrate ("PSAN") propellant -- propellant 2004 and propellant 2004L. After prolonged exposure to high temperature cycles and humidity, inflators using propellant 2004 can degrade, causing the propellant to burn too quickly when ignited. The rapid burning can cause the inflator to rupture during deployment, potentially causing serious or even fatal injury to vehicle occupants. See 2016 Blomquist Report at www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.gov/files/documents/expert_report-hrblomquist.pdf.Consequently, all frontal inflators using propellant 2004 that do not contain a "desiccant" (a substance that traps and holds moisture) in US vehicles are under recall. These "non-desiccated" inflators either have been or are required to be replaced.In some cases, the remedy part for these recalled inflators was, or will be, an inflator using either propellant 2004 or 2004L that does contain a desiccant. None of these "desiccated" remedy parts (which were installed in older model year vehicles) are currently under recall for a degradation concern. Certain subsets of desiccated PSAN inflators using propellant 2004 for use as original equipment, however, have been recalled for a degradation concern. All Takata inflators produced with propellant 2004L contain desiccant, and none of these desiccated inflators using propellant 2004L are under recall for a degradation concern. There have been no reported field ruptures in any non-recalled desiccated PSAN inflators.It is understood that desiccants fully saturate at some threshold, at which point any additional moisture will not be captured. This means the degradation process observed in non-desiccated inflators using propellant 2004 may also occur in non-recalled desiccated inflators using propellant 2004, assuming additional moisture enters the inflator and high temperature cycling occurs. Based on available information, desiccant saturation can occur within the first five years in the worst environments, and the time required for full saturation is affected by multiple factors. While no present safety risk has been identified, further work is needed to evaluate the future risk of non-recalled desiccated inflators using propellant 2004.Three entities -- Takata (now known as TK Global), the Independent Testing Coalition, and Exponent -- have been studying the long-term behavior of Takata desiccated PSAN inflators using propellant 2004L (as well as 2004) in the presence of moisture and temperature cycling. The research efforts, which include development of predictive modeling techniques and field sample analysis, are ongoing. To date, none of the researchers have identified field evidence showing that propellant 2004L is undergoing a degradation process that leads to aggressive deployment and potential rupture. However, the time in service of such inflators remains short compared to that of the inflators using propellant 2004. Further study is needed to assess the long-term safety of desiccated inflators using propellant 2004L.The Office of Defects Investigation is opening this investigation to examine whether a safety defect related to propellant degradation exists in non-recalled desiccated PSAN frontal inflators manufactured by Takata. This investigation will require extensive information on Takata production processes and surveys of inflators in the field. Lists of recall actions that may have used desiccated PSAN inflators as remedy parts, as well as the makes and models originally manufactured with them, is available with the downloadable version of this document (see nhtsa.gov/recalls?nhtsaId=EA21002 -- note this information is subject to change/revision as the investigation proceeds). This investigation does not supersede EA15-001, which remains open.

The rear subframe on the car is rusting badly and the Mercedes certified mechanic states that the entire frame needs replacement. With braking, the car could fishtail and be in a serious crash. The two model years prior to mine have had similar problems and a recall has been established for those years. I am asking the NHTSA to work with Mercedes-Benz to establish a recall for the 2015 C class before someone is injured as a result of this defect.

NHTSA ID

11766545

Incident

Sep 23, 2026

The vehicle’s rear subframe has become severely rusted and structurally compromised. This failure has caused the vehicle to pull sharply to the right when the brakes are applied. The rear subframe and affected components are still on the vehicle and are available for inspection upon request. This condition creates a serious safety risk because the vehicle can suddenly pull hard to one side during braking, making it extremely difficult to maintain control. At highway speeds or during emergency braking, this could cause the driver to lose control of the vehicle, leave the roadway, collide with another vehicle or object, or potentially result in a rollover. The failure is especially concerning because it directly affects the stability and braking behavior of the vehicle. The problem was inspected and confirmed by Mercedes-Benz of Durham. The dealer determined that the rear subframe was severely rusted and that this condition was responsible for the vehicle pulling strongly to the right during braking. The vehicle has therefore been inspected by an authorized Mercedes-Benz dealership. The condition has not, to my knowledge, been inspected by police or insurance representatives. There were no warning lights, dashboard messages, or noticeable symptoms indicating that the rear subframe was deteriorating before the problem became apparent. There was no advance warning that the subframe had become severely rusted. The issue only became evident when the vehicle began pulling sharply to the right under braking. Because there were no warning signs before the failure, I believe this condition presents a significant safety hazard. A driver may continue operating the vehicle without knowing that the rear subframe has deteriorated to the point that vehicle stability and braking control are affected.

NHTSA ID

11766498

Incident

Sep 21, 2026

I noticed some unstable braking at higher speeds. I took the vehicle to a mechanic and he discovered severe rust with perforation of the rear subframe "very near to where some of the suspension connects to it and is allowing a lot of extra movement, especially under braking." He told me that the vehicle was unsafe to drive on the highway or at speeds over 40 mph and should be repaired, preferably through Mercedes as soon as possible. I've reached out to Mercedes Benz USA. They told me that this has been a common problem and some vehicles have had the warranty extended because of it. My vehicle is not included in the warranty extention but they suggested that it may be eligible for a "goodwill" repair. I've reach out to my local Mercedes dealership to further investigate the problem and are awaiting a return call.

NHTSA ID

11765376

Incident

Sep 18, 2026

The rear structural subframe on my vehicle has experienced severe, premature corrosion perforation (rotting from the inside out), resulting in a major compromise of the vehicle’s structural integrity. This subframe is a critical safety component that supports the entire rear suspension, differential, and braking components. The subframe has rusted to the point of developing holes and structural cracks under normal operating conditions. This severe deterioration creates an immediate safety hazard, as a total failure or snapping of the subframe while driving can cause a sudden loss of vehicle control, unpredictable suspension geometry changes, and a severe risk of a high-speed crash.Mercedes-Benz has previously acknowledged an identical, widespread manufacturing defect and issued an extended 20-year warranty (NHTSA ID NCU-2023020004) for older model lines (such as the W204 and W212). However, my specific vehicle is currently excluded from that extension, despite suffering from the exact same premature metallurgical failure and safety risk. The deterioration is identical to the covered models, where road debris and water get trapped inside the hollow subframe unit, causing it to oxidize and disintegrate undetected from the interior until structural failure occurs.This constitutes a severe safety hazard. Driving with a compromised rear subframe risks a catastrophic detachment of the rear axle, control arms, and braking lines while at highway speeds. A sudden failure will lead to immediate loss of steering control and an incredibly high probability of a severe motor vehicle accident, endangering lives. I am filing this complaint to urge the NHTSA to investigate Mercedes-Benz and mandate an extension of the existing warranty framework to cover newer model years that exhibit the exact same premature corrosion failure. Dealers are denying coverage based on arbitrary VIN cutoffs, forcing owners to drive unsafe vehicles or pay out of pocket for a known structural defect.

NHTSA ID

11764483

Incident

Sep 13, 2026

The sunroof panel being cracked on this car is a well known and documented issue. There have been several recalls for it just not on my specific model. Yet I’m just like them, stuck with a broken in half sunroof panel that let water seep in and ruin my sunroof twice now, and the only fix is to pay $4500. This is insanely high for the small panel I’m talking about.

NHTSA ID

11751245

Incident

Mar 11, 2025

Sunroof Glass failure vin:55SWF4KB1FU039607 2015 Mercedes C300 2PM July 16 2026, Tampa highway near college park east coordinates28.06840 N.82.35292W TEMPERATURE 91F

NHTSA ID

11750865

Incident

Jul 16, 2026

Rear subframe has rust and holes. Dealer is saying not covered under warranty and asking for $8000

NHTSA ID

11729627

Incident

Apr 6, 2026

I am reporting a structural failure of the rear subframe due to corrosion on my 2015 Mercedes-Benz C300 4MATIC. The failure was diagnosed by an authorized Mercedes-Benz dealer, who confirmed that the rear subframe has corroded and broken, compromising the structural integrity of the vehicle. This is not cosmetic rust. The subframe is a load-bearing structural component, and its failure creates a serious safety risk, including potential loss of vehicle control. I have been advised that the vehicle may be unsafe to operate in its current condition. The vehicle has approximately 143,000 miles and has been registered and operated in Connecticut, a salt-use state. However, this level of corrosion leading to structural failure of a major suspension component is premature and not consistent with normal wear and tear, even in such environments. I contacted Mercedes-Benz USA and escalated the matter to an Executive Referral Manager. Mercedes-Benz acknowledged the seriousness of the issue but declined to provide any repair assistance, stating that my vehicle falls outside of warranty extension and goodwill parameters. Mercedes-Benz did not dispute the nature of the failure or its safety implications, but refused to address the issue based solely on internal policy criteria such as age and mileage. A rear subframe supports critical suspension components. Corrosion leading to structural breakage can result in instability, misalignment, or failure of suspension components while driving, increasing the risk of a crash. This issue appears to be consistent with known reports of rear subframe corrosion in similar Mercedes-Benz vehicles, raising concern about a broader safety defect. The failure was identified during inspection, and repair costs are estimated at approximately $5,000–$6,000. I am submitting this complaint due to the safety risk posed by structural failure and the manufacturer’s refusal to address the issue.

NHTSA ID

11724925

Incident

Jan 19, 2026

Complaint Clanking noise from the area of the speakers in the doors. Cause Under analysis. Remedy To narrow down the cause, first of all remove the door trim. • If the noise continues to occur even with the door trim removed, then continue the diagnosis working towards the speaker and if necessary, create a TIPS case with an informative video as an attachment. Information: Please refer to this document in the warranty claim and, after completing diagnosis, select the damage code corresponding to the component part that caused the problem. • If the noise stops when the door trim is removed, please proceed in accordance with LI72.10-P-067691. Information: In this case, do not use a damage code for the speakers in the warranty claim!

Single throttle lift-off clunking noise from the side shaft when moving off (audible at the outboard end). The noise is heard once in each instance when changing direction of travel. Note: Sound file in attachment Cause If the complaint is eliminated by experimentally loosening the outboard collar nut (by 1 turn), the problem is due to cracking of the microweld between the wheel bearing inner race and the joint housing of the side shaft. Note: The collar nut must always be replaced after being loosened. See also LI33.20-P-078406 Remedy Coat contact surface of side shaft with wheel bearing with Molykote paint. To do this, proceed as follows: 1. Remove side shafts 2. Clean contact surface A (see image file in attachment "Outer joint housing before") before coating with Molykote, using "spirit" (free of dust and grease) 3. Coat contact surface A (see image file in attachment "Outer joint housing after") with Molykote and leave to dry for "one hour" in removed condition 4. Reinstall side shafts Note: Before using the antifriction coating (Molykote), stir it or shake it thoroughly for (at least 1 minute).

Complaint There are several types of complaint about noises or poor windshield wiper wiping performance: A: Wiper blades squeaking, chattering, shuddering B: The windshield is not wiped completely (streaking) C: During the downward movement water is pulled back onto the windshield from the A-pillar (Figure 1) D: After windshield cleaning, water keeps spraying onto the windshield for several wipe cycles (Figure 2) A1: The windshield and wiper blades are contaminated with residues from car washing facilities, identifiable by the water beading. The resulting differences in the friction values between the wiper blades and the windshield can excite the wiper blades to vibrate. Note: It is mostly wax residue from the washer system, but also water-repellent nano-particle coating for paint and/or silicone-based washer fluid, that could cause this problem. A partially dry windshield also has different friction values, which can likewise result in squeaking of the wiper blades A2: The wiper blades are worn by mechanical damage (wiper lip damaged by ice or insect debris, or deformed by long periods of disuse). A3: Incorrect angle of incidence of the wiper arms to the windshield. Because of this, the rubber lip of the wiper blade may not flip over at the reversal point. Cause B: B1: Wax/ dirt residues on the windshield B2: Wiper blades deformed or worn B3: Downforce of wiper arm not OK (Figure 3) Cause C: Water is pulled back onto the windshield by the differential pressure created as the wiper arm moves downwards. Cause D: Washer water collects in the fastening of the wiper blade and is blown onto the windshield by the airstream over several wipe cycles. Note and supporting information: Wiper blades are wear parts which, even when "not used" for long periods (kept in park position), may become permanently deformed and damaged. Further stresses on the rubber wiper blade arise due to various environmental influences which progressively change the effectiveness of the rubber wiper blade and accelerate the aging process. Due to the natural aging process and wear, the wiper blades should be replaced twice a year, preferably in Spring and Fall (see operator's manual). Remedy Remedy A: A1: Cleaning entire windshield with A 000 986 40 71. A2: Checking water's flow behavior after windshield has been cleaned (see Video 1). If, after cleaning, there are still areas with water beading, then the cleaning process must be carried out again until a rejection reaction is no longer present. • Note: On the vehicle in the video (Video 1), water still beads on the bottom left of the windshield. The windshield is still not properly clean, even though it appears to be clean. The windshield is only properly clean when there are no more areas on the windshield where water beads. A3: Replace wiper blades with genuine wiper blades. Important: Only exchange wiper blades if windshield no longer has water-repellent areas Note: Replacement of wiper blades is not covered under warranty and can be replaced at the expense of the customer. Remedy B: B1: Clean windshield with intensive cleaner A 000 986 40 71. Important: Do not clean the wiper blades otherwise the graphite coating will be damaged. B2: Replace wiper blades with genuine wiper blades • Note: Replacement of wiper blades is not covered under warranty and can be replaced at the expense of the customer. B3: Check the wiper arm for excessive resistance in the bearing. Restore mobility or replace wiper arm if necessary. Remedy C: Problem inherent in design for which there is no technical remedy. Exception: X204 up to 02/2014. In these vehicles, it is possible to install the design configuration of vehicles as of 02/2014. This includes wiper arms (styled arms) with improved behavior in this respect. It is also necessary to replace the wiper blades because the styled arms feature a Top Lock connection (previously Side Lock).

Complaint Headlamp, front fog lamp leaky or fogged. Cause Fogging of the headlamps is a natural phenomenon, which can occur under certain climatic conditions. It does not lead to any technical impairment of the headlamp. If a pressure compensation diaphragm is fitted in the housing cover, then the lamp unit is a "closed system". Remedy Headlamp: Remedy 1 Clearing fogged/condensed LED headlamps: 1. Drive vehicle into workshop (temperature higher than +18 °C/+64.4 °F) and connect the exhaust extraction. Note: Do not perform an engine wash before the defogging test. 2. Switch off the engine and connect battery support via a charger. 3. Open the hood. 4. Switch on the lights. 5. Leave the vehicle in this state for 60 minutes. 6. Check for formation of condensation, a significant reduction in the formation of condensation must be clearly recognizable (thawing progress). Clearing of fogged/condensed LED headlamps and LED rear lamps on electric vehicles: 1. Drive the vehicle into the workshop (temperature higher than +18 °C/+64.4°F). 2. Connect battery backup via a charger. 3. Open the front-end flap and ensure sufficient ventilation. 4. Switch on the lights. 5. Leave the vehicle in this state for 60 minutes. 6. Check for formation of condensation, a significant reduction in the formation of condensation must be clearly recognizable (thawing progress). Clearing fogged/condensed halogen/xenon headlamps: 1. Drive the vehicle into the workshop (temperature higher than +18 °C/+64.4°F). Note: Do not perform an engine wash before the defogging test. 2. Switch off the engine. 3. Open the hood. 4. Switch off the lights. 5. Leave the vehicle in this state for 60 minutes. 6. Check for formation of condensation, a significant reduction in the formation of condensation must be clearly recognizable (thawing progress). Note: If there is no visible reduction in condensation, check the headlamp for malfunctions. (see Remedy 2) It is not physically possible to defog the headlamps completely. Fogging does not impair the operation or the service life of the headlamp. Note: Only implement Remedy 1 for model series 463 (from model year 2018) and model series 465. Remedy 2 A defective headlamp can be identified as follows: 1. Check the headlamp for external damage and that the cover caps and the diaphragm are correctly seated. 2. Check the electrical connectors of the plugs and pins. 3. Check for leak tightness according to LI82.10-P-078307. The test can only be conducted on headlamps. 4. If the headlamp or the rear lamp has any external damage, replace the component part in accordance with the WIS instructions. Note: External damage to the headlamp/rear lamp or faulty seating of the cover caps does not present a warranty or goodwill case. Note: With headlamps, it is possible to install desiccant packs if the problem occurs repeatedly. • Open ventilation system LI82.10-P-078302 • Closed ventilation system LI82.10-P-078304

Complaint Single throttle lift-off clunking noise from the side shaft when moving off (audible at the outboard end). The clunk is heard once when changing from forward to reverse (and vice versa). Note: Sound file in attachment Cause If the complaint is eliminated by experimentally loosening the outboard collar nut (by 1 turn), the problem is due to micromovement in the connection between the wheel bearing inner race and the joint housing of the side shaft. Note: The collar nut must always be replaced after being loosened and must be tightened to the specified torque. Remedy Coat contact surface of side shaft with wheel bearing with Molykote paint. To do this, proceed as follows: 1. Remove outboard side shafts (extract outer joint gearing from wheel hub) 2. Clean contact surface A (see image file in attachment "Outer joint housing before") before coating with Molykote, using "spirit" (free of dust and grease) 3. Coat contact surface A (see image file in attachment "Outer joint housing after") using Molykote and leave to dry for one hour in removed condition 4. Reinstall side shafts

Complaint Headlamp, front fog lamp leaky or fogged Cause Fogging of the headlamps is a natural phenomenon, which can occur under certain climatic conditions. It does not lead to any technical impairment of the headlamp. Remedy NOTE: If a pressure compensation diaphragm is fitted in the housing cover, then the lamp unit is a "closed system". Headlamp: Remedy 1 Clearing fogged/condensed LED headlamps and LED rear lamps: 1. Drive vehicle into workshop (temperature higher than +18 °C/+64.4 °F) and connect the exhaust extraction. Note: Do not perform an engine wash before the defogging test. 2. Switch off the engine and connect battery support via a charger. 3. Open the hood or trunk. 4. Switch on the lights. 5. Leave the vehicle in this state for 60 minutes. 6. Check for formation of condensation, a significant reduction in the formation of condensation must be clearly recognizable (thawing progress). Clearing fogged/condensed halogen/xenon headlamps: 1. Drive the vehicle into the workshop (temperature higher than +18 °C/+64.4°F). Note: Do not perform an engine wash before the defogging test. 2. Switch off the engine. 3. Open the hood. 4. Switch off the lights. 5. Leave the vehicle in this state for 60 minutes. 6. Check for formation of condensation, a significant reduction in the formation of condensation must be clearly recognizable (thawing progress). Note: If there is no visible reduction in the formation of condensation, check the headlamp for damage. (See Remedy 2) It is not physically possible to defog the headlamps completely. Fogging does not impair the operation or the service life of the headlamp. Remedy 2 A damaged headlamp can be identified as follows: 1. Check the headlamp for external damage and that the cover caps and the diaphragm are correctly seated. 2. Check the electrical connectors of the plugs and pins. 3. Check for leak tightness in accordance with LI82.10-P-078896 The test can only be conducted on headlamps. 4. If the headlamp or the rear lamp has any external damage, replace the component part in accordance with the WIS instructions.